PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
Kashmir: Human Rights and Peace - 12 March 2025 (Commons/Westminster Hall)

I beg to move,

That this House has considered Government support for human rights and peace in Kashmir.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Murrison. In south Asia, the long, drawn-out dispute of the state of Jammu and Kashmir remains a hanging fireball between two hostile nuclear neighbours: India and Pakistan. It has brought human misery in the form of wars and human rights violations, and it continues to threaten regional and global peace.

Last week, I spoke in the Westminster Hall debate on Kashmir and made it clear that the international community has been failing Kashmiris for the past 77 years, by not implementing the plebiscite determined by United Nations Security Council resolution 47 in 1948. Instead, for the past 77 years, we have seen the Indian Government take advantage of that failure by subjecting Kashmiris to unlawful killings, torture and multiple human rights violations.

More than half of my Birmingham Hall Green and Moseley constituents are of south Asian heritage, and the treatment of Kashmiris in Indian-occupied Kashmir has worried them for many years. As a born Kashmiri myself, seeing the level of atrocities, brutality and oppression in Indian-occupied Kashmir is devastating. It is also distressing that the international community, along with the United Nations, is not taking matters into its own hands and pushing to make the plebiscite happen and be a reality for many Kashmiris who have been suffering for over seven decades.

Last Saturday marked International Women’s Day. It would be remiss of us if, at a time when women’s rights and freedoms are celebrated, we do not speak of the cruelty and gendered violence that Kashmiri women are facing in Indian-occupied Kashmir every day. Kashmiri women have been subjected to constant sexism and objectification by the Bharatiya Janata party-led Government, with their bodies used as sexual and political tools to cast fear and intimidation.

According to Kashmir Media Service’s research section, between January 1989 and October 2023, more than 11,000 women were subjected to sexual violence. They have suffered through a lifetime of humiliation, rape and domestic violence, causing them non-stop distress and lifelong trauma. A form of repression being used against women in Indian-occupied Kashmir is enforced disappearances. Women are by far the biggest victims of this conflict and are being forgotten and deserted by the international community. The fact that the UK Government, along with other United Nations member states, have not implemented resolution 47 means that those women are living in a society where they are unable to remarry and are forced to suffer in silence, with no hope of justice.

The revocation of articles 370 and 35A in August 2019 by Modi and his BJP-led Government completely stripped Indian-occupied Kashmir of its special status and any form of autonomy, when the right to self-determination is what Kashmiris have been fighting for tooth and nail for many years. The Indian Government claimed that that move would help to stabilise the situation in the area. Instead, they imposed a lockdown, leading to mass protests, more arrests and further militarisation.

In July last year, Human Rights Watch stated that the Indian Government had still not restored freedom of speech and association since the revocation of article 370 in Kashmir. Nearly six years on, Kashmiris are still being forcibly silenced, and Indian forces continue to carry out repressive policies, including arbitrary detention, making the situation in the area as volatile as ever.

I commend the hon. Gentleman for securing this debate. What he says is absolutely right, and I am reminded of Proverbs 31:9:

“Open your mouth, judge righteously, defend the rights of the poor and the needy.”

The hon. Gentleman is doing exactly that—well done.

In Indian-administered Kashmir, we cannot ignore human rights, but we also cannot ignore the religious persecution against, for example, Ahmadiyya Muslims, which restricts their right to even exist. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that we must also stand in solidarity against destroying freedom of religious belief? The right to love your God and worship your God as you so wish is part of who we are.

I wholeheartedly agree with the hon. Gentleman that any persecution or atrocities, whether on humanitarian or religious grounds, are not acceptable, and the international community should be taking them seriously.

In a clear human rights violation, Modi and his Government imposed a total media blackout in the area, leading to a complete lack of international media coverage. Journalists in Indian-occupied Kashmir are being harassed, and it has been reported that surveillance by the authorities has become more common. An Amnesty International report states:

“Thousands of activists, human rights defenders, journalists, and political figures found themselves imprisoned”

under anti-terror laws.

My hon. Friend is making a fantastic speech. Does he agree that the detention of human rights activists, such as Khurram Parvez, is particularly egregious? That individual has been detained without trial for several years and has always fought for the rights of others. Perhaps my hon. Friend can persuade the Minister to inquire after his wellbeing.

Khurram Parvez is not the only political prisoner; Yasin Malik and many others are in that situation. I am sure that the Minister will respond accordingly to that.

Journalists who work abroad have been stopped from flying out of the country, and others have had their passports impounded without reason—a blatant interference with the right to mobility. Local media has been stripped of its editorial independence. It is heavily dependent on Government advertising and suffused with opinions and news reports tailored to pro-Government narratives.

As I said in last week’s debate, if Modi and his Government have nothing to hide, and if everything happening in the area is completely democratic, why are they not allowing international observers and human rights organisations in and out of Indian-occupied Kashmir? It is because they know that, if they do, the lies that they have been spinning to the international community will begin to unravel. Since 2019, Modi’s BJP-led Government have cut internet, mobile and telephone lines, which has been an obvious attempt to cut the area off from the outside world, and vice versa.

My hon. Friend is making a very passionate case for the rights of Kashmiris. He is absolutely right to mention the revocation of articles 370 and 35A. Does he agree that that was in direct contravention of international law and a clear attempt by the right-wing Modi Government to quash the Kashmiris’ struggle? And is he as concerned as I am at the lack of international condemnation?

My hon. Friend and I are on the same page when it comes to Kashmir and the struggle for Kashmiris. The violation of international humanitarian law should not fall on deaf ears from the international community.

I commend my hon. Friend for securing today’s debate. I want to raise a specific issue about internet communications, which has been raised with me by my constituents and is of great concern to many people. Does he agree that although it is important that India and Pakistan agree a way forward and solve the issues in Kashmir, the needs and views of local people in Kashmir need to be taken into account?

Absolutely; my hon. Friend’s point is bang on. The outcome of the plebiscite has to be one where the Kashmiri people decide. It is their future and they are entitled to decide that.

The Indian Government seem to think that they are above international law, as is evident from their horrific treatment of Kashmiris. Kashmiris have been subjected to physical and sexual violence, emotional distress and having their voices taken away from them. The question now is what more must they go through before the international community starts to pay attention to them?

This Government must now take steps to right the wrongs against the Kashmiri people. Notwithstanding the more than 25 United Nations resolutions calling for a solution of the dispute, India is reluctant to grant Kashmiris the right to self-determination. Kashmiris are not begging for freedom, nor will they beg. It is a birthright that will eventually be achieved. Let me be clear that this is not a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan alone. The international community needs to take responsibility.

United Nations resolution 47 not being implemented is the unfinished business of this Government, given that the resolution was determined when the United Kingdom was under a Labour Government. It was a Labour Government then and it must be a Labour Government now who help the Kashmiri people in their fight against injustice. This Labour Government must not roll out the red carpet for Modi, as the previous Government did. The UK Government must push for the long overdue plebiscite and hold India accountable for its actions against the Kashmiri people.

The hon. Member is making some very important points, which were also raised last week. As he said, this is not just a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan; by virtue of the origination of the problem, in which Lord Mountbatten was instrumental, Britain has an important role to play. Is he therefore concerned about what the Minister said last week about this being a matter that should be left with Pakistan and India to resolve themselves?

I am on the record in stating my dissatisfaction, not only as a born Kashmiri but for the Kashmiris seeking justice, with the view that this is a matter for India and Pakistan alone. Successive Governments have taken that view. It is not a view I subscribe to, and I do not believe it is a view that the current Government should subscribe to.

The world cannot afford to ignore Kashmiris any longer, because it is a matter of humanity and justice. The goal for Kashmiris has always been to self-govern and gain the right to self-determination. That right is not a privilege, but a fundamental human right and the United Kingdom must do everything in its power to help Kashmiris towards that. This is an issue of international significance on which the UK should take a leading role, given its historical involvement in the current situation.

Those rights are further secured and protected by the 1948 universal declaration of human rights. The right to self-determination embodies the basic rights of people to make decisions about their destiny. We have an international obligation to support peace and the equal and just treatment of all humans. What happens or is condoned in Kashmir has both regional and global ramifications. It is thus vital that we take sincere steps right now to act in good conscience.

It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Murrison. I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Hall Green and Moseley (Tahir Ali) for securing this debate. I am also grateful for the contributions of other hon. Members and will try to respond to the points raised.

I note that my colleague, the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Hornsey and Friern Barnet (Catherine West), who has responsibility for the Indo-Pacific, spoke about human rights in Indian-administered Kashmir in a Westminster Hall debate on 5 March. I appreciate the importance and complexity of the issues relating to Kashmir and the strength of feeling about it in the House.

As the House is aware, India and Pakistan are important friends of the UK. We have strong and deep bilateral relationships with both. We encourage them to engage in dialogue and to find lasting political solutions to maintain regional stability. The Government’s position is that it is for India and Pakistan to find a lasting political resolution for Kashmir, taking into account the wishes of Kashmiri people. It is not for the UK to prescribe a solution or act as a mediator.

My hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Hall Green and Moseley spoke movingly about human rights in Kashmir. We recognise that there are human rights concerns in both India-administered Kashmir and Pakistan-administered Kashmir. The UK Government encourage all states to ensure that their domestic laws are in line with international standards. Our position is clear: any allegation of human rights abuses is deeply concerning, and it must be investigated thoroughly, promptly and transparently.

There are various conflicts across the world at the moment and conflicts always require mediators to end them. Given our history with the continent, can the Minister explain why the Government think that the UK does not have a role as a mediator?

As my hon. Friend knows well, this is an area of the world in which we have long been engaged. It is the position of this Government, as it has been of many previous Governments, that for this issue to be resolved sustainably it will require an agreed compromise between the two countries. That remains our position.

Will the Minister give way?

I will make a little bit of progress, and then I will.

It is vital to ensure effective and constructive dialogue with the communities affected. We raise our concerns, where we have them, with the Governments of India and Pakistan. The UK Government are monitoring the situation. I understand that several restrictions put in place in Indian-administered Kashmir have been lifted. We are clear on the importance of human rights being respected, and we continue to call for all remaining restrictions imposed since the constitutional changes in August 2019 to be lifted as soon as possible and for any remaining political detainees to be released.

I welcome the fact that the Government are calling for the human rights abuses, which have escalated since 2019 after the illegal revocation of articles 370 and 35A, to be ended. Will the Minister clarify one point? While he uses the line used by successive Governments that this is a matter for India and Pakistan, will he at least confirm that we support the Security Council resolutions that very clearly restate the birthright of the Kashmiris to self-determination through a free and fair plebiscite?

I thank my hon. Friend for his important question. It is our long-standing position that for India and Pakistan to find a lasting political resolution on Kashmir, the wishes of the Kashmiri people do need to be taken into account. I do not want to go beyond the existing position that I have set out.

The hon. Member for Oldham East and Saddleworth (Debbie Abrahams) asked why the UK Government are not doing more to bring about peace. Could the United Kingdom Government be the mediator or the honest broker here, bring parties together, suggest ideas for solutions and find an honest way forward? That might be what we all seek.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question; I know of his long-standing commitment to peacemaking and mediation. We continue to judge that it is not for the UK to prescribe a solution or act as a mediator.

Returning to the subject of human rights, I want to address the important issues relating to the role of journalists. The UK Government are aware of reports of the detention of a number of journalists in Indian-administered Kashmir. We are clear on the importance of human rights being respected, and we continue to call for any remaining restrictions on journalists to be lifted as soon as possible and for any remaining political detainees to be released.

I now turn to the specific cases raised by my hon. Friends. I am aware that in May 2022, Yasin Malik, an Indian national, was sentenced to life imprisonment after being convicted of funding terrorism. I am aware that he has been in custody ever since. Although it is not for us to comment on an independent judicial process in another country, we encourage all states to ensure that their domestic laws adhere to international standards for free and fair trials, and that they respect international obligations in their treatment of detainees.

I will give way to the hon. Member for Birmingham Perry Barr (Ayoub Khan), then to my hon. Friend the Member for Bolton South and Walkden (Yasmin Qureshi)

It is precisely the language being used by the Minister that undermines the position of Britain on the global platform. Our position is that, on the one hand, we champion human rights and criticise any violation of international law, but on the other hand, we are very selective when it comes to applying sanctions. We are very reluctant to impose sanctions on a global economic power such as India. We say things like, “This is a matter for India and Pakistan.” We reach out to them and invite them to negotiate, but we do not actually uphold international law. Does the Minister agree that that is at the core of why Britain is being undermined internationally?

I do not accept that our position on Kashmir undermines the commitment to international law that this Government have sought to evince in all our actions. In relation to the allegations that have been referenced in this debate and the many other reports from both Pakistani-administered Kashmir and Indian-administered Kashmir, we expect international law to be upheld and we continue to hold our principled position on these questions.

Will the Minister give way?

I will give way to my hon. Friend the Member for Bolton South and Walkden first.

I thank the Minister for giving way. He said that there was a trial process for Yasin Malik in India, but if one looks into that case and how the trial was conducted, it is quite clear that no proper due process or law was followed. For example, he was actually in a prison cell at the time his so-called trial was taking place. He was not able to communicate with, or even see, those sitting in judgment on him. It is not just me saying this; these are documented facts. It is quite clear that the process Mr Malik went through was actually not a trial at all. In the light of that, should we not be asking the Indian Government about their process in relation to Mr Yasin Malik?

I thank my hon. Friend for her question and her long commitment to these issues. We do encourage all states to ensure that their domestic laws adhere to international standards on free and fair trials, and that that is seen through fully.

I am grateful to the Minister for sparing so much of his time. I welcome his making the Government’s position clear that we will call out human rights violations in the region and condemn violations that occur, but will the Minister also confirm that, in line with our policy and our international obligations, no future trade deals in the region will be agreed at the expense of Kashmiris’ human rights? I say this despite the fact that I promote trade deals in the whole region of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, because it has a great deal to offer.

I thank my hon. Friend for his important question. We remain committed to the promotion of universal human rights. When we have concerns, we raise them directly with partner Governments, including at ministerial level. That is undertaken completely separate from any negotiations of trade agreements, but agreeing trade deals is part of building open and trusting relationships with important partners, which then allows for some of those free and frank discussions about human rights to take place.

We welcome reports that some detainees have been released, but we remain concerned by some ongoing detentions. I note that the people of Indian-administered Kashmir have recently used their collective voice through a 64% turnout in the state assembly elections last October in what was happily a largely peaceful electoral process. We also note that the state legislative assembly in Srinagar has now been restored.

I reiterate that India and Pakistan are long-standing and important friends of the United Kingdom. We encourage both to engage in dialogue and find lasting diplomatic solutions to maintain regional stability. The UK Government’s position is clear: any allegations of human rights abuses are deeply concerning and must be investigated thoroughly, promptly and transparently. In recent years, the UK Government have raised our concerns with the Governments of India and Pakistan.

Question put and agreed to.